Sharing 'hate' posts online could mean six months in prison

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5707039/Sharing-hate-posts-online-lead-six-months-jail.html Quoting:

* Critics say the proposals mean heedless insults could result in prison sentences
* Someone who creates hate speech that threatens life should expect three years
* Aggravating factors include activity ‘in a particularly sensitive social climate’

Social media users who share or comment on racist or anti-gay postings will face jail under rules proposed yesterday. Advice for judges and magistrates recommends harsh punishments for those found guilty of stirring up hatred against racial, religious or sexual minority groups. Among those jailed should be people who post comments or share online hate speech because they have been reckless as to whether they stir up hatred, say the proposals from the Sentencing Council.

Youtube:

That's just stupid. The best way to create enemies is to manufacture them. this will cause people to become sympathetic...

wait..why am I giving advice to my enemies?

yes, by all means, lock people away for posting naughty posts online.

It is unbelievable they are so willing to criminalise the native peoples over ethnic or sexual minorities. Are there really that many true hate crimes committed that such legislation needs to be introduced? What has happened to the UK over the last 20 years? And why are Britons so apathetic today?

frankhammer wrote:It is unbelievable they are so willing to criminalise the native peoples over ethnic or sexual minorities. Are there really that many true hate crimes committed that such legislation needs to be introduced? What has happened to the UK over the last 20 years? And why are Britons so apathetic today?

I think it's largely a case of the internet bringing out the worst in people and in a public way which could not have happened before. But, yes, the law is too strong. The word 'hate' has been redefined to mean something more like 'disrespectful' or 'insulting'.

Why are Britons politically apathetic? Mainly it's the outdated voting system which keeps the same parties and politicians in power. But it seems that politicians in Britain are more self-interested and distant than elsewhere. Maybe it's to do with the social class culture - the Norman overlords and the Saxon peasants.

Where is the free speech ?
Beh, restrictives laws doesn’t change anything about politics or ethnics opinions.
If I can’t talking about my opinions in public, I will finding others ways of speech, but my ideas doesn’t change.

I think it's weird that GB is becoming so socially and politically stifled, considering that it was the birthplace of freedom of speech and individual liberty. ;p

OsricPearl wrote:I think it's weird that GB is becoming so socially and politically stifled, considering that it was the birthplace of freedom of speech and individual liberty. ;p

Reminds me of this I read the other day:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5729225/Police-facial-recognition-used-help-catch-criminals-risks-damaging-public-trust.html

A controversial facial recognition system to help the police catch criminals risks damaging public trust and could even be unlawful, a watchdog has warned.

Elizabeth Denham, the independent Information Commissioner, said the software, which scans crowds for a ‘match’ on a database of possible offenders, could be ‘particularly intrusive’. She spoke out as a damning report into automated facial recognition technology (FRT), used in conjunction with CCTV cameras, found it was ‘almost entirely inaccurate’.

Miss Denham said there was a ‘real risk’ that the public safety benefits of the state-of-the-art technology would be lost. She also announced a separate investigation into the ‘proportionality’ of police forces holding more than 19million mugshots. Known as custody images, they are taken at police stations of people who are arrested or questioned – but the database includes hundreds of thousands of innocent people . . .

It is leading to concerns that Britain is sleepwalking into a surveillance state, says Big Brother Watch. In a blog posted yesterday, Miss Denham said: ‘There may be significant public safety benefits from using FRT – to enable the police to apprehend offenders and prevent crimes from occurring . . .

She has written to the Home Office and the National Police Chiefs’ Council ‘setting out my concerns’. She said: ‘Should my concerns not be addressed I will consider what legal action is needed to ensure the right protections are in place for the public.’ She also said she was studying the ‘transparency and proportionality’ of mugshots kept on the Police National Database, especially for those arrested but not charged . . .

Silkie Carlo, director of Big Brother Watch, said: ‘It is deeply disturbing and undemocratic that police are using a technology that is almost entirely inaccurate.’

OsricPearl wrote:I think it's weird that GB is becoming so socially and politically stifled, considering that it was the birthplace of freedom of speech and individual liberty. ;p

I always thought that the USA was the birthplace of freedom and liberty, that was the  whole reason behind the revolutionary war.

England now, is very different than America. It is still tied with the old fashioned European way a slave to the United Nations.
They will be better off once it is split ,free market ability to make your own laws and most of all a new American princess!
A new era for Britain!

OsricPearl wrote:I think it's weird that GB is becoming so socially and politically stifled, considering that it was the birthplace of freedom of speech and individual liberty. ;p

The idea of hate speech came from America though. We adopt a lot of your social trends. But we've not copied your right to free speech because that's an old thing that doesn't get pushed by trendy celebrities. We are also influenced by European Human Rights and have now actually incorporated them into our own law. So Britain has kind of adopted the American guilt over black slavery and also the German guilt over the Holocaust and it's become one big wave of virtue signalling. I'm sure it will all fizzle out one day like every trend does. But by that time, it will probably have had a permanent effect on the British identity.

I respect people who stay true to their convictions and say things for how they are. The truth is multiculturalism is inevitably going to bring a clash of cultures especially incompatible ones unless they are forcibly assimilated into the dominant culture. If people have to; they should challenge societal norms that preaches political correctness and double standards that seek to undermine one's country, cultural history and ways of life. All to often, the citizens understand the fundamental significance of their country's history and culture better than any foreign migrant or corrupt politician who put a price on everything they latch on to.

I believe many of us are in situations where challenging the staus quo would place us in a precarious position. Especially with the current ability for others to take something specific you've said, place their spin on it, spread it through the social media and seriously harm your reputation.

I personally have a business and income that could be destroyed by such people. And these persons know the power of social media and how to use it. It keeps us silent or too an extent, in line.

It also creates a lot of inner resentment and how many others feel this way? More than likely, quite a lot. But in the meanwhile, our children are going through an education system designed to change views and conform to the new norm.

The internet has opened up the world to many but taken away your ability to be true to yourself.

Notice how the words 'hate' and 'hatred' are being used to describe comments and feelings which are often just mild insults, sarcasm and simple dislike or disapproval. It's labelling quite normal behaviour as outrageous wickedness.

Neon Knight wrote:Notice how the words 'hate' and 'hatred' are being used to describe comments and feelings which are often just mild insults, sarcasm and simple dislike or disapproval. It's labelling quite normal behaviour as outrageous wickedness.

And unless you're already at the bottom of society, this labeling is effective at keeping people in line. You've seen peoples careers destroyed so you measure your words.

Who here doesn't? An honest answer by members here would be interesting. In public, via social media (not  a medium I use frequently), I do.

frankhammer wrote:

Neon Knight wrote:Notice how the words 'hate' and 'hatred' are being used to describe comments and feelings which are often just mild insults, sarcasm and simple dislike or disapproval. It's labelling quite normal behaviour as outrageous wickedness.

And unless you're already at the bottom of society, this labeling is effective at keeping people in line. You've seen peoples careers destroyed so you measure your words.

Who here doesn't? An honest answer by members here would be interesting. In public, via social media (not  a medium I use frequently), I do.

It's only civilised to measure our words to avoid insulting and provoking people but we should all feel free to express political opinions. Even with internet anonynimity, I don't always say exactly what I think. But talking to friends in a pub I would speak completely freely and wouldn't really care if someone overheard.